The Missouri Compromise- Connor Smith
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 The question of slavery and how the young nation would deal with it had long been asked but had never actually been addressed. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was one of the first laws that attacked slavery head-on. With the request of statehood from Maine and Missouri, the Senate faced the question of how to balance the power of the slave states to prevent tension in the new nation. The Senate convened and stated that Maine could be entered as a free state and Missouri could be entered with no restrictions on slavery, but it also made all western territories north of Missouri’s southern border free states. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 marked the beginning of the long debated topic of the extension of slavery westward that was a major cause of the Civil War (“Missouri Compromise”, par 1-3). Historical Context Slavery was a way of life when it applied for statehood in 1819. By the time Missouri reached the minimum of 60,000 people for statehood, about 10,000 of the those people were slaves (“The Missouri”, par 1). The precursor of the Missouri Compromise was the Missouri Enabling Act, led by James Tallmadge of New York. He added two amendments where the only way Missouri would be admitted was if its residents would agree to eventually prohibit slavery. This narrowly passed the House and was stopped in the Senate where it remained a deadlock (“The Missouri”, par 2). At the time, the North barely controlled the House while South controlled the Senate. With political tensions rising, the question of slavery became more of a power struggle than a moral issue or the rights of slaves. The sectional issues of the government showed how it was a “political tinderbox” (“The Missouri”, par 3). The Northerners believed that the South already had too much power in Congress, so they believed that the addition of more slave states would greatly strengthen their power, making their voices unheard. A compromise on the issue was reached in 1820, deemed the Missouri Compromise where Missouri would enter as a slave state and Maine would be admitted as a free state. This created the precedent that a free and slave state would be admitted at the same time to create balance in the Senate. It was proposed by Northerners, and would greatly halt the expansion of slavery out West. The South also agreed to: “And be it further enacted. That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the state, contemplated by this act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited…” (Clay, sec 8) This satisfied the Southerners because Arkansas was viewed as “ideally suited for plantation slavery and the plains north and west of Missouri as little more than a treeless desert” (“The Missouri”, par 3). How It Led to the Civil War The Missouri Compromise was one of the first legal documents to actually address the question of slavery. Tension rose greatly from the committance of Missouri as a state. Southerners did not believe that Northerners were actually fighting for the rights of slaves. They believed that it was a scheme to strengthen the Federalist Party and the central government by taking away states’ rights. The Northerners saw the debate as \tgbrrty6tg]fr5 an end for slavery. They saw Southerners passing laws to protect and extend the longevity of the institution. Both sides were using the topic of slavery as a way to gain power in government, so both wanted equal representation by having an equal number of free to slave states. The Missouri Compromise also instated the precedent of when admitting a free pinche pene what tf state; a slave state is also admitted. This was the way things went until 1850 (Huston, 282). This compromise settled the issue for a while until new territories were claimed by America, like the California and Oregon territories. The Southerners wanted to extend the line to the Pacific Ocean, but the Northerners believed the line just pertained to the Louisiana territory (Huston, 282). Thomas Jefferson was highly against the Missouri Compromise, stating: “A geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated. This, like a fire-bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once the knell of the Union” (Jefferson). Conclusion Although the cause of the Civil War is still debated today, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 created an ill will between the North and South that never went away. The topic of slavery had been a divisive issue between the North and South, the Missouri Compromise put “salt in the wound”. The Missouri Compromise may have somewhat solved the issue of slavery and states rights, but it created problems for the future by only fixing the problem temporarily. Resources "Balancing Power." Picture. '' Maxwell Syr''. Web. 2 Dec. 2013. Brown, Richard. The Missouri Compromise: Political Statesmanship or Unwise Evasion?. Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1964. Print. Clay, Henry. “Transcript of Missouri Compromise.” Our Documents. 6 Mar. 1820. 25 Oct. 2013. Foley, William E. "Missouri Compromise." World Book Student. World Book, 2013. Web. 25 Oct. 2013. Huston, James L. "Missouri Compromise (1820)." Major Acts of Congress. Ed. Brian K. Landsberg. Vol.2. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 280-284. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 25 Oct. 2013. “Missouri Compromise 1820.” Picture. PBS. Web. 17 Nov. 2013. “Missouri Compromise.” Britannica School. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. 2013. Web. 25 Oct. 2013. "The Missouri Compromise." American Eras. Vol. 6: Westward Expansion, 1800-1860. Detroit: Gale, 1997. 186. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 25 Oct. 2013. Willard, Paula. "The Civil War in Missouri." The Missouri Compromise. Web. 31 Oct. 2013.